October 04, 2005
It's in the P-I

This morning's P-I: "Election 2005: County elections office passes audit"

Unfortunately, the reporter failed to realize that the audit was so junky as to be meaningless. Kind of like the Arthur Anderson audit that Enron passed.

Keith Ervin at the Times had a more discerning article "Audit finds security lax in '04 King County election"

But this one line cracks me up:

Auditors found no evidence of fraud in what was the closest governor's race in state history, [lead auditor Ernie] Hawkins said.
Of course he found no evidence of fraud, he didn't look for any. Councilmember Kathy Lambert and I both tried to get him to look at and offer his opinion on some stuff that looks an awful lot like fraud, but he refused to even look at it.
County election officials also have made "significant and noteworthy progress" in improving flaws that allowed invalid ballots to be counted and left valid ballots uncounted, Hawkins said.
Hawkins would have no idea about any of this, as his team didn't examine a single ballot or envelope. He has no basis for judging the quality of the ballot processing.

I think the audit itself was a fraud.

UPDATE: The fraudulent audit (fraudit) report is posted here. As I predicted, the sleazebags who were supposed to have been audited but really weren't had already prepared self-congratulatory press releases (Logan and Sims).

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at October 04, 2005 10:01 AM | Email This
Comments
1. There has never been an escape from Stalag 13!
There is no fraud.
This election was 99.98% accurate.
A error rate any bank would love.

Only one of those is a comedy line.

Posted by: JCM on October 4, 2005 10:59 AM
2. Looks like win-win to me!

Posted by: South County on October 4, 2005 12:12 PM
3. I love this line:

County election officials also have made "significant and noteworthy progress" in improving flaws that allowed invalid ballots to be counted and left valid ballots uncounted, Hawkins said.

When you "improve the flaws" you made the flaws better. If you improve the system, you eliminate or reduce the flaws.

Just a thought.

Posted by: Paul Stone on October 4, 2005 01:03 PM
4. I agree with Stefan. This audit IS a fraud.

Posted by: Misty on October 4, 2005 01:21 PM
5. See...now wasn't that easy? If you don't look for fraud, you don't find fraud. If you don't find fraud, you don't have to do anything about it. Just fork over the taxpayers money for the silly report (the one that didn't look for fraud).

Posted by: dl on October 4, 2005 02:46 PM
6. Wow...I gotta find me a way to get a job with those election guys! That's gotta be a sweet position, where even the auditors don't know or care what you are doing!

But seriously--what does the deafening silence of the Seattle papers, et al, tell us?
Do they just print what certain people tell them to print, or do they go out and find things that aren't right or that don't make sense, and research, and fact-check, and other journalism-type stuff? Of course, the rhetorical question has a clear answer.
It is clear that even one piece of evidence of election problems--yes, even ONE piece (and Stefan has found more that one)--is proof that these audits and reports and press releases are rhetorical propaganda. I should stop being dumbfounded, but I just can't drop my jaw any further than it is now without risking chin scrapes from the ground.

Posted by: pseudotsuga on October 4, 2005 03:06 PM
7. "improving flaws" Snort.

Posted by: Liberated Liberal on October 4, 2005 06:02 PM
8. Stefan---
You understand....the SCOPE of the Audit in no way was designed to detect fraud.
IN ORDER TO BUST THESE A$$HOLES,
You must do a public records request for all the auditors workpapers and all documents shared with Dean Logan and any of his staff members.
If you can get DETAILED TIME REPORTS of those that did the audit, perhaps it will show how much time was spent on each particular task---there should be some record of how the Auditors staff guys spent their time that accumulated to $300,000+.....all consultants keep track of time, because that is what they are selling.
You, Stefan, need to AUDIT the entire AUDIT....from workpapers to documents the frauditors looked at and how there "work" ties in to the final FRAUDIT Report.
They will definitely try to stop you from getting those workpapers.....it's a FIREWALL STEFAN!!
Perhaps we can get the State Auditor in by filing a complaint about this expenditure and requesting the state auditor evaluate the charges (i.e. bill).
I have not done any auditing for over 25 years....perhaps one of your other "faithful" has and can help you with this. IT'S AUDITING 101!

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on October 4, 2005 08:51 PM
9. Let's cut to the chase; With Ron Sims behind it, what else could an audit like this be other than a fraud ?

How do we get David Irons elected ?

Posted by: KS on October 4, 2005 09:22 PM
10. KS - by going to http://www.davidirons.org and checking out that link to his campaign website.

THIS ignored press release from the King County Council GOP Caucus may also be important.

Remember to vote for Heavy Iron on 8 November (early and often and make sure your will includes a ballot to vote from the grave like a DemocRAT)!!! Your state is counting on it!!!

Posted by: David Irons Supporter on October 5, 2005 01:55 PM
11. Oh and THIS King County Journal editorial on the fraudit sounds like some guy from the Sound Politics Consortium wrote it... :-)

Posted by: David Irons Supporter on October 5, 2005 02:00 PM
12. Another reason for David Irons as Isee It! I hope enough others feel the same way!

Posted by: Laurie on October 6, 2005 07:49 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?